Michele Costanzo interviews Bernard Tschumi about his work and his vision of the changing field of contemporary

design research. How do the younger generation of students receive Tschumi's seminal theoretical works? Is a lack

of time merely the current scapegoat for a more considered conceptual approach? How does Tschumi view the

proliferation of architectural fetishes in the urban landscape? How is his own theoretical landscape shifting?

Twenty Years After (Deconstructivism)

An Interview with Bernard Tschumi

24

In the early 1990s, there was a significant schism inarchitecture. This was triggered in the recently globalisedworld of design by a simultaneous crisis in theoreticalthought and a growing shift towards the formal. As thepreoccupation with form developed through the decade itconcurred with a burgeoning international economy,which paved the way for the exponential rise of thesignature architect. Elevated by the association with thegilded world of the global brand, the architectural doyeninevitably became separated from the spatial concerns ofthe city. However, with the current economic slowdownand an acute growing awareness of wider issues, such asthe imminent shortage of water, food and energy as wellas climate change, the reconsideration of the architect asmerely a marketing instrument or branding package hasbecome pressing. It is now time to re-evaluate how thearchitect might become an operative figure in the world ofaesthetics while being attentive to social and urbanobjectives.

The fact that Bernard Tschumi is both a theoreticianand a designer is key to understanding his distinctiveapproach to architecture. After completing his degree atthe Federal Institute of Technology (ETH) in Zurich,Tschumi moved to London in 1970 to teach at theArchitectural Association (AA) under the directorship ofAlvin Boyarsky. In 1976 he moved to the US where hetaught at the Institute for Architecture and UrbanStudies, founded by Peter Eisenman, and the Universityof Princeton, before taking up a position as a visitingprofessor at Cooper Union in New York in the early 1980s.

In the late 1970s, Tschumi began to focus onidentifying a different and more direct relationship witharchitecture through a series of drawings known as TheScreenplays (1977), in which he used collages of imagesfrom film noir to experiment with the technique ofcinematic editing and montage. This research wasexpanded in The Manhattan Transcripts (1981) with itsthree simultaneous levels of reality:1 the event(represented by documentary-style news photography);movement (re-created by diagrams of movements fromchoreography and sport); and space (explored throughphotography, and building and site plans). This effectivelyplaced the architectural experience in close proximity onthree different levels.

In 1983 when Tschumi won the competition to design the 50-hectare (125-acre) Parc de la Villette in Paris, he entered the world ofprofessional practice and started to build a series of highly iconicprojects, pervaded by a profound theoretical investigation. His ties withacademia, however, remained strong, and in 1988 he was appointedDean of the Graduate School of Architecture, Planning andPreservation at Columbia University in New York. His 15-year term atColumbia testifies to his efforts in the field of education, an activitythat provided him with a great deal of stimulation and an importantoutlet for his ongoing speculative, intellectual reflections on themaking of architecture.

Between 2001 and 2002, the drawings from The ManhattanTranscripts were included in a significant retrospective exhibition thattravelled to four US cities. Curated by Jeff Kipnis, ‘Perfect Acts ofArchitecture’ displayed the graphic work that Peter Eisenman, RemKoolhaas and Elia Zenghelis, Daniel Libeskind, Thom Mayne andTschumi all produced in a 10-year time period – from 1972 to 1982.2

Paper architecture, Kipnis notes, can have a role in the history ofarchitecture provided that it is innovative and if its main purpose is thedrawing in itself.3 In other words, it must suggest new research trendsand have an objective value. Work was selected from that particular erain order to consider these points by highlighting their internal values.However, although supported by a profound theoretical content, theyall subsume the historical momentum in which they were produced. Byencapsulating the social context and the economic transformationstypical of their time, they stress their affiliation to a period of greatcommunication changes. This incontrovertibly led to the profusion ofcomputer-aided design with its almost inexhaustible potential.

In his selection of the six projects for the exhibition, Kipnis capturesa renewed confidence.4 There is a strong sense that the featuredarchitects are poised to pass on something important to ensuinggenerations. In a similar way that it was apparent in other cultural andartistic forms at the time, such as cinema and rock music (think of2001: A Space Odyssey from Stanley Kubrick, or Electric Lady Landfrom Jimi Hendrix).

Transcending History and ‘Concept-Form’ Interviewing Tschumi provided the unique opportunity to ask himwhether he shares Kipnis’ interpretations of the featured projects. Doeshe think that The Manhattan Transcripts continue to have a theoreticalvalue to emerging generations, providing a catalyst for new ideas?

‘While the mode of communication and the general sensibility ofThe Manhattan Transcripts clearly belong to the period, the issues theyexplore always had the ambition to transcend the historical conditions

Bernard Tschumi, Concert Hall and Exhibition Centre, Rouen, France, 2001This cultural complex is located at the gateway to Rouen, close to the National Route 138. The concerthall plays host to various musical and sporting events, and the new exhibition centre accommodateslarge conventions and trade fairs. The concept involves two envelopes, with a large ‘in-between’ areawhich, animated by the various routes to the hall itself, becomes one of the project’s key spaces.

25

26

of their time. My interest at that time (as well as today)was to try to contribute to – or potentially alter – thegenerally accepted definition of what architecture is.Hence issues of movement and event, together with theirmode of notation, were first of all an investigation into thenature of architecture.

‘Had I engaged in the work today, it is likely that theuse of computers would have radically changed the appearance of the work. Would it have changed thecontent itself? Probably up to a point, yet the questioningwould have remained fairly comparable, due to the largerissues at hand. Would the new generations be able todraw from them? I have always been suspicious of thenotion of generations. I rather believe in a certainperiodicity of themes, returning to haunt us at certainmoments of history.’

Tschumi’s generation was able to dedicate a great dealof time to further research and careful consideration of

conceptual design. Is this, however, now a justifiable scapegoat for theloss of any conceptual approach to design?

‘There have always been periods of conception and periods ofconsumption. This is due to economic or social forces way beyond thecontrol of architects. I would say that, as opposed to the1970s, theearly 21st century is characterised by a faster cycle of production andconsumption. This raises conceptual as well as political issues. I hopethese will soon be investigated.’

Given Tschumi’s association with Deconstruction, I was keen to findout what his understanding of the ‘formalistic’ is vis-à-vis the currenthedonistic attitude affecting architecture now:

‘What is “form”? The problem is that both media and dictionariesdefine it in the most reductive and banalising way: “form as the outlineof an object against a background”. So does the architecturaldictionary of received ideas. I find more pleasure in what I would call“concept-form”, bringing a high level of abstraction in orchestratingtogether a complexity that includes materials, movement andprogrammes in the definition of architectural form.

Bernard Tschumi, Blue Residential Tower, Manhattan, New York, 2007This 17-storey residential and commercial tower in the Lower East Side of Manhattan includes 32 apartments.The strategy was to create a highly specific architectural statement that responds to the eclecticism of the historicneighbourhood. Its original, pixellated profile is a new presence in the Manhattan urbanscape.

27

on the one hand raise interesting questions about a new form ofarchitecture, yet on the other signify an impoverishment ofarchitectural thought and invention. I personally like the challenge ofdifferent geographical or social contexts as a stimulus to newarchitectural concepts.’

Given the distractions and difficulties of executing work, do youthink it remains important to establish the ‘theoretical core’ aroundwhich architecture is to rely on in the near future? ‘Probably not onesingle synthetic core, but four or five anchor points, around whichissues revolve and occasionally intersect: space, programme, body,envelopes, global versus local, economy of means, typology versustopology, concept-form, etc.’

Given this, can the theoretical/conceptual nucleus of a projectsafeguard architecture from the market?

‘Architecture does not need to be safeguarded: commerce has alsobeen a driving force of progress throughout history. Yet it iscommercialism that is problematic – when market forces begin tocontrol every aspect of architectural thinking.’

‘I suppose it is the same distinction as betweenpornography and eroticism. They are both okay, but one issubstantially more complex and more abstract.’

Spectacle?‘I also would not completely condemn the production

of spectacle. After all, it can also be theorised ... ‘

Context, Place and Theory Designers cannot avoid including in their work thechanges occurring in their everyday lives, whether it is amatter of interpretation or mirroring their own innerthoughts. With this in mind, how can we view theproliferation of architectural fetishes in the urbanlandscape; that is, the uncontrolled diffusion ofarchitectural objects that are indifferent to theenvironment they are part of?

‘This indifference is more problematic. Exporting thesame “shapes” to Bilbao, Los Angeles or Abu Dhabi may

Bernard Tschumi, Parc de la Villette, Paris, 1983–98The aim of this project, which marked the starting point of Tschumi’scareer as a theorist and designer, was to create a new model for theurban park, in which programme, form and ideology all play integralroles. The image represents, as the architect asserts, the idea that theimportance of architecture ‘resides in the ability to accelerate society’stransformation through a careful agency of spaces and events’.

Bernard Tschumi, Lindner Athletic Center, University of Cincinnati, Ohio, 2006Representing the epicentre of the university’s athletic andacademic activities, the unusual curvilinear shape of thisbuilding takes advantage of the tight constraints of the siteto create dynamic residual spaces between the existingstadium, sports fields and the recreation centre.

28

29

Tschumi’s buildings tend to be vital places open to a range ofhuman activities and exchanges: places committed to the satisfactionof social needs. However, in the third volume from Event-Cities,5 theidentification of the ‘Concept, Context, Content’ triad seems to haveremoved the role of the user from architecture’s original aim. What hascaused such a change in the understanding of strategic planning?

‘To move from “Space, Event, Movement” to “Concept, Context,Content” is by no means a negation of the first triad. On the contrary,my goal is to expand the earlier issues by inserting the unavoidablecomplexity that reality entails. To bring context and content to eventand movement is a way to confront them with the realities of bothculture and production.’

In recent times, words like ‘event’ and ‘space’ in Tschumi’s workhave been replaced by others like ‘concept’ and ‘context’. This seemed to start happening with the project for the New AcropolisMuseum. Does this shift in terminology represent a criticalreassessment of the work?

‘The project for the New Acropolis Museum had a profound effecton my thinking. After we won the competition and for a couple of years,I was not sure what to make of it. It did not fit neatly into theargumentation around my earlier projects. So I would rarely talk aboutit. And yet I knew the project was important. It took me a while torealise that this project brutally confronted issues that I had been ableto sidestep before, such as the issue of context. Rather than areassessment of the work, it became a means to expand thought aboutthe overall work, a case where practice feeds theory.’

The last consideration, in which Tschumi asserts that it is possiblein defined circumstances to arrive at a theory through practice,explains and analyses more thoroughly what he affirmed at thebeginning of his studies and reflections on the project: that ‘concept,context and content are part of the definition of contemporary urbanculture and therefore of architecture. Theory is a practice, a practice ofconcepts. Practice is a theory, a theory of contexts.’6 4

This interview has been compiled from email correspondence between Michele Costanzoand Bernard Tschumi from April to June 2008.

Translated from the Italian version into English by Paul David Blackmore

Notes1. The Manhattan Transcripts, Architectural Design (London), 1981; 2nd edition, AcademyEditions (London), 1994.2. For an overview of the exhibition seehttp://www.sfmoma.org/exhibitions/exhib_detail.asp?id=42.3. Jeffrey Kipnis, Perfect Acts of Architecture, The Museum of Modern Art (New York) andWexner Center for the Arts (Columbus), 2001.4. The six featured series of drawings in the exhibition were as follows: Rem Koolhaas andElia Zenghelis, Exodus or The Voluntary Prisoners of Architecture, 1972; Peter Eisenman,House VI Transformation Collages, 1976; Bernard Tschumi, The Manhattan Transcripts,1976–81; Daniel Libeskind, Micromegas, 1978, and Chamber Works, 1983; Thom Mayne(Morphosis Studio), Sixth Street House, 1986–87, and Kate Mantilini Restaurant, 1986.5. Bernard Tschumi, Event-Cities 3, MIT Press (Cambridge, MA, and London), 2005.6. Event-Cities, op cit, p 3.

Text © 2009 John Wiley & Sons Ltd. Images: pp 24, 26, 29 © Peter Mauss/Esto; p 27 ©Sophie Chivet; p 28 © Christian Richters

Bernard Tschumi, New Acropolis Museum, Athens, 2009The distinctive characteristic of this new museum structure is itsrelationship with the ancient Acropolis and celebratedmonuments which sit on a plateau overlooking the city. Thebuilding highlights the individual elements on the site byfocusing on the creation of broad and inspired views from thedifferent vantage points within the museum.

Bernard Tschumi, School of Architecture, FIU Miami, Florida, 2003The Florida International School of Architecture is a place in which social exchange, discussion and debate between students and teachers are key. Its buildings are thus generators of events andinteractions. According to Tschumi: ‘The project can be described as the sobriety of two wings defining a space activated by theexuberance of three colourful generators. The sober wings are made of precise yet user-friendly precast concrete; the threegenerators are, respectively, varied yellow ceramic tiles, varied red ceramic tiles and nature.’

Bernard Tschumi, Concert Hall, Limoges, France, 2007Like the Rouen Concert Hall and Exhibition Centre, the LimogesConcert Hall is based on the idea of a double envelope. The innerenvelope, which delineates the perimeter of the performance space,is clad entirely with wood, while the exterior envelope is composedof polycarbonate panels. The concept responds to the dramatic site:a clearing in a large forest at the edge of the city, surrounded by200-year-old trees.